Serenading the kami question

The question itself is very simple. If I play Serenading the kami, have my action blocked, conclude combat and then hidden lurker, does the "lurker" minion get the bonus to strength? Relevant card text: Serenading the Kami Type: Action Modifier Requires: Thaumaturgy Cost: 1 blood Only usable when the action is announced. [tha] The acting vampire gets +1 strength for the duration of this action. [THA] As above, but with +2 strength. Rarity: Gehenna:C and: Hidden Lurker Type: Action Modifier Requires: Obfuscate Only usable by a ready untapped vampire other than the acting minion. Only usable after a combat between the acting minion you control and a blocking minion. [obf] Tap this vampire. This vampire enters combat with the blocking minion. The first round of this new combat, the blocking minion cannot strike. [OBF] As above, with an optional press. Rarity: Jyhad:C VTES:C SW:C CE:U KMW:PAn4 My question arises from 2 points: 1: Serenading the Kami states that "the acting vampire gets +X str for the duration of the action" Nowhere does it mension "this acting minion" as is the case with things such as Torn Signpost. 2: Hidden Lurker has already been re-designated as a action mod, not an action unto itself, therefore would the the vampire performing the HL then become "the acting minion" as defined by Serenading the Kami? Logic suggests no, but card text suggests yes. I could be missing some rule and, as such, sound like a bit of idiot but I couldn't find one. Anyone want to hazzard a guess/ set me straight? Thanks in advance Sutekh_23

sutekh_23 <bec...@aapt.net.au> wrote: > The question itself is very simple. If I play Serenading the kami, have > my action blocked, conclude combat and then hidden lurker, does the > "lurker" minion get the bonus to strength? > Logic suggests no, but card text suggests yes. I could be missing some > rule and, as such, sound like a bit of idiot but I couldn't find one. > Anyone want to hazzard a guess/ set me straight? Card text suggests "no". Serenading the Kami says "The acting vampire". Hidden Lurker is not an action. The vampire who played it is never "the acting vampire".

Jozxyqk wrote: Card text suggests "no". Serenading the Kami says "The acting vampire". Hidden Lurker is not an action. The vampire who played it is never "the acting vampire". -So exactly what is the designation of the 'lurkered vampire? Is it now considered "the reacting vampire" rather than "the acting vampire"? Or something else? Hidden lurker is not an action true, but a modifier to the original action, therefore to me it would seem that as not being an action in its own right, nor a reaction to the aforemensioned action it would be by default, be part of the same action and therefore affected by Serenading. Take Psyche for example: Psyche! Type: Combat Requires: Celerity [cel] Press. [CEL] Only usable at the end of a combat when both combatants are still ready. Enter combat with the opposing minion. This is a new combat. Using a psyche to restart combat would result in losing all previously played cards that pertain to "the current combat" due to the fact that psyche states that it is a new combat. However an effect such as Serenading the kami would still be in effect as it is still "the acting vampires" action. Now, following this train of thought, as HL is an action modifier, rather than a reaction, it stands to reason that the HL'ed vampire now becomes "the acting vampire" as it now becomes part of the original action, rather than a new action. The point would be entirely moot if Serenading stated "this acting minion" but it doesn't, it states "the acting minion" Thanks for your response Jozxyqk but I can't see your argument on why the HL'ed vamp does not become "the acting minion" Cheers Sutekh_23 (Whats your thoughts on the matter LSJ?)

"sutekh_23" <bec...@aapt.net.au> wrote in message news:1142657365.3...@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com... > Jozxyqk wrote: > > Card text suggests "no". > Serenading the Kami says "The acting vampire". > > Hidden Lurker is not an action. The vampire who played it is never > "the > acting vampire". > > -So exactly what is the designation of the 'lurkered vampire? Is it now > considered "the reacting vampire" rather than "the acting vampire"? Or > something else? Something else. I believe he is the "modifying vampire." See, for example, Blanket of Night or Malleable Visage for usage of this term on a card, or the rules team ruling on Cloak the Gathering (RTR 19941109) for usage of the term in an existing ruling. - Pat

Pat wrote: Something else. I believe he is the "modifying vampire." See, for example, Blanket of Night or Malleable Visage for usage of this term on a card, or the rules team ruling on Cloak the Gathering (RTR 19941109) for usage of the term in an existing ruling. - Pat OK, I had a look at these and still there is a problem: Relavent card text: Malleable Visage Type: Action Modifier Requires: Vicissitude Cost: 1 blood [vic] Only usable by a ready, untapped vampire. Usable when an ally you control is blocked, before combat begins. The combat is canceled; untap the acting minion and tap this modifying vampire. This vampire enters combat with the blocking minion. [VIC] As above, but usable when a vampire you control is blocked. And: Blanket of Night Type: Action Modifier Requires: Obtenebration Cost: 1 blood [obt] +1 stealth. [OBT] Only usable by a vampire other than the acting minion when a minion attempts to block an acting minion you control. Tap this modifying vampire to cause the block to fail; that blocking minion cannot attempt to block this action again. The problem now arises from the fact that both these cards redesignate the vampire as "the modifying vampire" where HL does not, all it states is that this vampire enters combat with the blocking minion so, once again, I fail to see the argument. Maybe I'm blind or being stubborn, but to me I still fail to see why Serenading would not work. Thanks for the response though pat. Cheers Sutekh_23

Hidden Lurker Type: Action Modifier Requires: Obfuscate Only usable by a ready untapped vampire other than the acting minion. Only usable after a combat between the acting minion you control and a blocking minion. [obf] Tap this vampire. This vampire enters combat with the blocking minion. The first round of this new combat, the blocking minion cannot strike. [OBF] As above, with an optional press. Sutekh, c'mon man, use your brain. Only usable by a ready untapped vampire OTHER THAN the acting minion, hence the lurker vampire is NOT the acting minion and would therefore NOT benefit from serenading. A better question might be, what card do you know of that benefits more than one vampire without explicitly stating exactly which ones? ~m

In message <1142662547.7...@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, sutekh_23 <bec...@aapt.net.au> writes: >Pat wrote: > >Something else. I believe he is the "modifying vampire." It would help greatly if you'd use Google's quoting functions properly. Hit Show Options. Then hit "Reply" from that menu. This places quote characters (>) in front of the quoted text, meaning that the rest of us can quickly see the old text and your new text. This is what Google themselves recommend you do: http://groups.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=12348&topic=250 Summarize what you're following up. When you click "Reply" under "show options" to follow up an existing article, Google Groups includes the full article in quotes, with the cursor at the top of the article. Tempting though it is to just start typing your message, please STOP and do two things first. Look at the quoted text and remove parts that are irrelevant. Then, go to the BOTTOM of the article and start typing there. Doing this makes it much easier for your readers to get through your post. They'll have a reminder of the relevant text before your comment, but won't have to re-read the entire article. And if your reply appears on a site before the original article does, they'll get the gist of what you're talking about. -- James Coupe PGP Key: 0x5D623D5D YOU ARE IN ERROR. EBD690ECD7A1FB457CA2 NO-ONE IS SCREAMING. 13D7E668C3695D623D5D THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.

sutekh_23 wrote: > Relavent card text: > > Malleable Visage > the acting minion and tap this modifying vampire. This vampire enters > > Blanket of Night > modifying vampire to cause the block to fail; that blocking minion > > The problem now arises from the fact that both these cards redesignate > the vampire as "the modifying vampire" where HL does not, all it states Acting vampire: vampire who plays the acting card / attempts the action Blocking vampire: vampire blocks or is attempting to block Reacting vampire: vampire who plays the reaction card Modifying vampire: vampire who plays the modifier card This vampire: the vampire playing this card Some cards refer to the acting vampire (Serenading the Kami). Some cards refer to the modifying vampire. To redesignate a vampire, explicit card text is needed. Mask of a Thousand Faces redesignates the modifying vampire as the acting vampire. Hidden Lurker does not redesignate the modifying vampire, so he is still not the acting vampire.

LSJ wrote: > > Acting vampire: vampire who plays the acting card / attempts the action > Blocking vampire: vampire blocks or is attempting to block > Reacting vampire: vampire who plays the reaction card > Modifying vampire: vampire who plays the modifier card > This vampire: the vampire playing this card > > > To redesignate a vampire, explicit card text is needed. > Mask of a Thousand Faces redesignates the modifying vampire as the > acting vampire. > Hidden Lurker does not redesignate the modifying vampire, so he is > still not the acting vampire. Thank you LSJ (and everyone else who helped out)